User talk:Dschwen/Archive5

Crystal Clear

Hallo, ich seh gerade, dass Du wach zu sein scheinst. Kannst Du mal einen Blick in die Versionsgeschichte dieser Seite werfen und sie ggf. halbsperren? Da finden quasi nur Testedits und Vandalismen statt (die Seite ist stark von externen Seiten aus verlinkt, u.a. von digg). Dankeschön :-) --Überraschungsbilder 22:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Jo erledigt, danke für den Hinweis. --Dschwen 22:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:CH cow 2.jpg, which was nominated by Benh at Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:CH cow 2.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

BTW you may want to archive ;-) Lycaon 21:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B Angela Merkel 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QICbot tweak

As per vote Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Proposal_for_QIC_closing can we tweak QICbot so that it move promote/declined candidates after 48 hours and passes in unreviewed candidates after 8 days instead of 15? --Tony Wills 12:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, thats easy to adjust, but keep in mind that it currently runs only once a day, so it might be 48-72h max (unless I schedule it to run more often...). Sorry for not having been able to add the automatic CR handling, I've been busy with WikiMiniAtlas lately, but it is still on my todo list and it's half done so far. --Dschwen 13:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it matters much if they're done after 48 or 72 hours, it's just to get things moving through QIC faster, to keep the list down to a more manageable size. And thanks for your work on QICbot for CR, I know you'll get it done when you can :-). If there are major problems with the CR format we can of course tweak it a little. Re your geocoding experience, you might wish to contribute to this discussion about QI and geotags. --Tony Wills 00:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B Neue Wache interior 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

File:B Neue Wache interior 2.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B Neue Wache interior 2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Meet our photographers

Hi Daniel, The randomizer seems to leave me out, trailing at the bottom of the page. What did I do wrong? Cheers. Lycaon 09:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. Maybe you have to increase the sampling (reload, reload, reload) for a better statistic ;-) --Dschwen 11:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't know what caused it, but now it works. Thanks for the randomizer. Lycaon 11:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

QICbot query

I'm just trying to work out why the 1-Sep promotion of Image:Kronenkranich IMG 1123.jpg (nominated 31-Aug) hasn't yet been executed by QICbot? --Tony Wills 20:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I guess it wast the extra whitespace which I just removed. I'll update the bot to ignore it. --Dschwen 09:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ahh yes, I think we have had that problem before, good spotting :-) --Tony Wills 12:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Rhone upper reaches 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! B Angela Merkel signing autographs 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Externsteine regen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Image:Berlin Hauptbahnhof Spree pano.jpg

Hello, I uploaded a new version of Image:Berlin Hauptbahnhof Spree pano.jpg where I removed some (dust?) spots. I assumed you wouldn't mind. If you do mind I can revert it. S Sepp 13:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, thanks. Where did you remove the dust spots? --Dschwen 13:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Near the upper right corner and also in the left part of the sky. S Sepp 20:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pavement texture.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hermannsdenkmal statue.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bi Jahnplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goe Bahnhofsvorplatz.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin Hauptbahnhof Spree pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH Bern Kramgasse.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Berlin Cathedral.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QICbot hat mir ein QI "untergeschoben"

Hallo Dschwen,
erst einmal danke für deinen QICbot. Er ist uns eine große Hilfe bei den QIC. Ich habe dort ein Bild zum QI befördert. Daraufhin hat dein QICbot, als er es aus der Liste genommen hat, dieses QI mir, anstatt dem wahren Schöpfer zugeschrieben. Inzwischen habe ich das von meiner Talkpage entfernt und Raul auf seiner Talkpage verständigt. Ich wollte dir das nur aufzeigen. An der Nominierung ist mir bis jetzt auch im Nachhinein nichts ungewöhnliches aufgefallen, was diesen Fehler hervorrufen konnte. Ich war nur der Reviewer, weder Uploader noch Nominierer.
Beste Grüße,
Florian --Florian Prischl 17:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Die Nominierung war nicht korrekt signiert. Ein Wunder dass die überhaupt vom QIBot verarbeitet wurde. Mit einer Ersatzunterschrift ({{user|Boricuaeddie}}) kommt der Bot eigentlich nicht klar (und sollte sich mit Please sign with name and date beschweren!). --Dschwen 18:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Goe Bicycles.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QICBot on a roll?

Something went wrong ([1]). Have a look when you have a free moment. Thnx. Lycaon 14:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Check this edit [2]. People come up with new ways to confuse the bot every once in a while :-) --Dschwen 16:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Moving to Illinois

So you are moving to Illinois? I'll be in the windy city in November (here) to participate in a meeting - Alvesgaspar 16:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

What about meeting for a cup of coffee and a little photoshoot then? Will you be there on a weekend (and have time too)? --Dschwen 17:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

• Sure, I'll pass there a whole week (arrive the 7th). Just give me a phone number and I'll call you. It's a shame that the wind is one of the worst enemies of nature macro shots... Alvesgaspar 22:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bremen Hbf pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Pics from today

Hey Daniel, I posted some of the pics that came out Ok for me, check them out at: User:Dori/gallery/Champaign-Urbana#20071006. Dori - Talk 03:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice! I'll try to upload my stuff tomorrow. --Dschwen 20:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

QI deleted during or after QICbot

Hello Dschwen,

This image File:Panoramic view of Schneeberg Alps, Austria .jpg has been deleted during it QI promotion process. I've got my userpage changed accordingly (see User_talk:Afernand74#Quality_Image_Promotion_11) but it is not available anymore. Any idea where my image went to?

Thanks for your help --Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 11:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Panoramic_view_of_Schneeberg_(Alps,_Austria).jpg this one? --Dschwen 13:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry. I got back to this file because it disappeared from Google Earth (with Geocommons) without reason, like most of my recent uploads.

I then checked the corresponding category page.

I am not sure I understand. When I check on its category [3], the thumbnail is ok but when I click on it, I get an empty file. Same thing happens on this description page Schneeberg (Alps). --Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 13:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. Probably a cache problem on your end. --Dschwen 14:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I realised that only images with names containing special characters like "(...)" give problems but only with Firefox v2.0.0.7 with extension NoScript v1.1.7.2.

• Here is what they say in their faq Looks like the Anti-XSS feature causes problems with URLs containing diacritics or other non-ASCII characters. It should be possible to handle through whitelisting though.

• It blocks Wikipedia cross-site scripting (XSS) while surfing from en.wikipedia to commons.wikipedia and eventually to upload.wikipedia to see full resolution images.

Solution is then three-fold:

• Restrain the use of special characters (use oe instead of ö for example).
• Do not use (,[ or ),] anymore in filenames. ;-)
• ... and rename all my conflicting images. Is there any procedure to do it properly?

Sorry for having you bothered with that. Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 09:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:NYC mural brooklyn united you stand.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:NYC mural brooklyn united you stand.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Evrik 04:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal concerning User PH-n templates

Hi, there is a proposal and vote concerning the {{User PH-0}},...,{{User PH-3}} templates, that you may be interested in. --Tony Wills 10:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Robert Kennedy Jr. speech 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Translation help

I saw on the danish Village Pump you needed help with some translation regarding Commons:WikiMiniAtlas/Translations? If you still need help feel free to contact me. --Old Batteries 22:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Translations

Hi mate. I'm done with the translations. :) --Old Batteries 16:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

GE-overlay

Hallo wenn der Toll-Server wieder arbeitet, kannst du mal einen Blick auf Commons_talk:Geocoding/Overlay-de werfen, ich denke das Problem liegt an einem fehlenden header (); wie ich ihn auch unter http://tools.wikimedia.de/~kolossos/geoworld/marks-source.php benutze. Kolossos 17:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Schau Dir auf dem TS doch mal die ersten 12 Zeilen von ~para/public_html/GeoCommons/earth.php an. Die wuerd ich einfach uebernehmen. Para hatte in dem verlinkten Kommentar geschrieben, dass der Filename header ( header('Content-disposition: inline; filename=doc.kml'); ) geholfen hat. --Dschwen 19:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hup das sollte passen, für die Browser-Abfragen wird er sich schon seine Gedanken gemacht haben, wobei ich ich nur mit: ::header('Content-type: application/vnd.google-earth.kml+xml'); arbeite. --Kolossos 21:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your coordinate helper

Wow! Your coordinate helper is fantastic! Thank you Dschwen. Now I'll have a lot of fun Geotagging images. --LucaG 07:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Glad you like it. Thanks for all your awesome pictures and for taking time to geocode them! --Dschwen 20:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Robert Kennedy Jr. 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Wikiminiatlas question

This is from es:wikminiatlas, but I don't know if it's a local problem or not. You'll see, if I write {coor dm|...|type:city} , {...type:landmark} etc, I get different zoom levels (as appropiated, a landmark needs more zoom than a city). However, with scale: parameter I never get it to work, I can write scale:200, scale:2000, scale:20000 and I will always end up with the map showing the whole continent. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the scale: paramater, maybe it's a local problem. Do you have an idea what could be wrong? -- Drini 21:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do know what the problem: I have not yet implemented the scale parameter :-). Let me put this on top of my list. --Dschwen 02:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:CTA tower 18.jpg

I am trying not to be involved with QI or FP, but I find it difficult to do this when I see Image:CTA tower 18.jpg in the QI list. I actually saw it in the New Image stream and looked at it then. I particularly like how inspiring it must have been for who ever was sitting in that tower to not have collisions right outside their door.

Instead of supporting it, I downloaded it and rotated it 1.90 degrees clockwise. Are you old enough to know clockwise and counterclockwise? With GIMP, it was 1.90 positive degrees -- I don't know about photoshop. I put an xcf of what I did online http://carol.gimp.org/GIMP/2007/Nov/CTA_tower_18.xcf.gz (still uploading as I type this) or I can upload the jpeg, or I can try to forget this and mind my own business.... -- carol 17:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Haha. I guess we need a babel-box for This user can tell clockwise from counterclockwise, or This user has owned/seen/heard_of analog clocks. Sigh, I guess I am old enough, thanks for reminding me ;-). Just upload a JPG version right over the original. --Dschwen 17:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I missed this reply -- sorry. When I graduated from high school, I got my first digital watch. I had already read the words from this book about how badly earth seemed to the rest of the universe because they thought that digital watches were cool. It was years later (and perhaps the reason that I did not enjoy e&m) when we were using our thumbs and fingers to determine the vector rotation -- which is probably what the thumb in that book is all about. Evolution seems to make some complications that are (for me at least) too complicated to think about. -- carol 21:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, thanks for the response here. -- carol 21:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CTA red line rerouted.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CTA tracks.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QICbot

Minor QICbot problem. When archiving entries with a space between the image name and template it doesn't insert the "../Promotion". Eg "| {{/Promotion" does not get changed to "| {{../Promotion". (I think the image is promoted correctly and a space in the same place for declines seems to be ok). --Tony Wills 22:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CTA Quincy station.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CTA tower 18.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Translations for MediaWiki interface to Mayflower search?

Hey, Dschwen, could you check out Commons:Village pump#Mayflower search at the village pump? It is a question about (in part) adding translations for the MediaWiki interface to the Mayflower search engine. If there is someone else I should ask, feel free to point me in the right direction.  :-) Cheers, --Iamunknown 05:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CTA waiting on the platform.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

User:Dschwen/coordinates.js

Quickie: In the code it says the template name could be overriden, but I can't find a way to (unless I copy the whole page instead of linking it). The reason I wonder it's because I've been succesfully using that on eswiki: es:Usuario:Drini/monobook.js, inserts link, but then I have to manually change the template name. So, overriding it would make everything quickier, yet I don't know how to set the variable when the script is linked. -- Drini 16:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, fixed it. Just insert var coord_templatename = 'coord'; somewhere into your monobook.js --Dschwen 16:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Lovely, thank you. -- Drini 17:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You might want to append the semicolon to be on the safe side though. --Dschwen 17:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Eine kleine Übersetzung

Hab im de-Forum gesehen, dass du ein Ami bist und en-3 hast...
Kannst du mir vielleicht "Blick auf den geschlossenen Leitapparat einer Francis-Schachtturbine in nicht geheberter Ausführung. Am unteren Bildrand ist das Steuergestänge zur Regulierung des Leitapparates zu sehen." für Image:Francis-Schachtturbine.jpg übersetzten?

Uff, was gehebert ist weiss ich leider nicht. Das hab ich auch nicht im Artikel gefunden. Kannst Du das umschreiben?

Leider nicht, weil die Beschreibung nicht von mir stammt...

Als ich im Internet gesucht hab ist in einem Anderen Internet Lexikon im Zusammenhang mit dem Artikel Bier das wort geschlaucht gefallen, was denke ich dort soviel wie umgefüllt heißen sollte.

Ich hab dem Benutzer auf de.wikipedia mal eine Mail geschickt, was jetzt genau damit geiment ist.

However, ich glaub nicht dass geschlaucht der ganzen Beschreibung jetzt eine totale Wende gibt, so dass es meiner Meinung nach vernachlässigt werden kann.

Nochmals vielen Dank für deine Hilfe :-)

--D-Kuru 02:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

PS: Wegen Image:NYC mural brooklyn united you stand.jpg:
COM:DW sagt zu USA: These countries have freedom of panorama only for buildings, but not for sculptures or other works. Nachdem was ich von COM:DW weiß, reicht das einverständnis des Autor des Bildes auf dem Mauer aus um es unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlichen zu können.

mfg --D-Kuru 15:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ich die Mail an den Maler abgeschickt hatte. Ich frag einfach nochmal. --Dschwen 15:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Nashville pano Opry Broadway.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chattanooga pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ryman Auditorium.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! River Styx.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

An early break?

Has QICbot gone on Christmas holiday already? ;-) --Tony Wills 09:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Yup, but I just recalled him. Lazy bum. --Dschwen 14:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

:-) --Tony Wills 20:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

coordinates.js

I hope you don't get mad, but I added a couple of changes to [4] to allow further customization (decimal places for seconds, and changing the default type), if I shouldn't have, then I apologize. -- Drini 18:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, that's perfectly fine! The next step would be to include an easy mechanism to add a heading to the coordinates. --Dschwen 18:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Tataa..

Impressive work! I would say, in my own language, that you have the patience of a chinese. The result is pretty good considering the poor light conditions (this will help to raise "the pano bar", I'm afraid....). How could you get rid of all noise, especially in that black building a little to the right, and still conserve this sharpness? Alvesgaspar 21:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was shot with my Macro lens at ISO 400 and f/7.1 (which now that I look at it wasn't the smartest choice!). Nonetheless ISO 400 has fairly little noise, plus the image was downsampled from about 160 Megapixels to a meager 18 Megapixels. Next time I'll hope for better light, choose a slightly wider aperture, and check my shots more careful on site; maybe that will result in my first >100MP pano... I'll have to point out that the very recent developments of Hugin (0.7 Lucerne edition) helped tremendously in assembling. Even at f/7.1 the 150mm Sigma lens has unacceptable vignetting for a panoramic image (would result in light and dark bands in the sky when assembling). Hugin now has automatic vigneting correction (and exposure and whitebalance correction too!). It is really fun to go over old images or badly taken pano sets and see what the new version can make of them. --Dschwen 22:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

snippy comment?

Where is the wiktionary:snippy comment with the strike out? And thanks for the strike out by the way.

I was bothering someone who is probably mostly innocent about that missing comment. -- carol 21:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you again. I don't see being snippy as constructive. Well, sometime you'll need to blow off steam, but I usually try to find other ways for that... --Dschwen 23:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reichstag pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! UIUC Illini Union and Main Quad.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

QI promo tag - but I didn't do it

Just a few moments ago, a new QI promotion tag was added to my talk page, even though I am neither the nominator nor the uploader (I promoted the image a few days ago). How did that happen? I remember there was a problem with the original nominator's signature... now what should I do? Cheers... --JDrewes 12:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Instructions MOP

Kannst du weiterhelfen? ---> Commons_talk:Meet_our_photographers#Instruction --Simonizer 16:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! CH boundary stone Albrun pass.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! John Hancock Center pano view.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Upload form

See also User talk:Pfctdayelise#Upload form.

I've put together a prototype for a newly structured upload form that, amongst other things, forces people to enter a source, an author, and a license before uploading. Works ok on Firefox, but I could use help with handling multilingualism in an easily extensible way and with getting it to work properly on other browsers, in particular on IE. Interested? Lupo 14:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure! But I'm on sucky dial-up for the next 10 days :-( Christmas holidays back at home... If it can wait till the beginning of January I'd be happy to help! --Dschwen 12:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Great! No hurry. It won't go live over the Xmas/New Year holidays. In fact, it remains to be seen whether we ever go live with this. Lupo 15:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Withdrawn

I've been think for a while that QI needs a 'withdrawn' template to distinguish entries not actually declined, so I created one. I now realise this may annoy Mr QICbot, so I will manually process these withdrawals until I get some feedback from others about whether it is a good idea, we can then worry about QICbot at that point. --Tony Wills 02:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Mr QICbot will just ignore templates it does not know yet. But a withdrawn template would be easy to implement, it would be treated just like the Decline template, wouldn't it? --Dschwen 12:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Picture of the Year/2007/Translations/de

Hi Dschwen :)

The POTY German translation still needs more translation of the announcements, and a German language contact. If you could help out, or maybe pass the word on to some others who might be interested, that would be ace. :) thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 03:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I'm currently in sucky/no internet land. Will be back January 2nd. Is that soon enough? I'd be happy to help then. --Dschwen 13:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

That will be fine! The competition doesn't start until the 10th. Hope you have a good restful break. :) cheers --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

qcbot seems to have placed the message in the wrong place?

QCBot seems to have been confused by this edit? Regards, Ben Aveling 16:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see where the confusion is? Looks like a regular unsigned nomination to me. Am I missing something? Are the other closed noms not correctly archived? --Dschwen 13:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

It seemed to me that it put the text in the wrong place - in front of the nomination instead of after it. It means that the bolded text ends up outside the blue box, which looks odd. I assumed that was a mistake. I'd rather see something inside the box, and probably something more like "unsigned nomination; please sign with Ben Aveling 14:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)", just to keep everything as clear as possible for people who aren't as familiar with QI as us. All the best, Ben Aveling 14:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC).

Trouble with Bots, they create no end of work for their masters :-) --Tony Wills 10:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summary

Just looking though my watchlist and noticed that you(QICbot) use the edit summary "please sort these into the appropriate categories" maybe it should be "please sort these into the appropriate galleries" so that it doesnt confuse people, yeah I know it hasnt yet its just a thought, especially for people who need to translate things. Gnangarra 14:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:Reichstag pano.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Reichstag pano.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Simonizer 17:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Commons Guide

Hello,

Having seen a number of your pictures in QI and FP sections, I was wondering if you would be interested in sharing some of your knowledge and assist in writing of a photography guide for Commons users?

Could you please see this page:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Photography_Guide_Project_Alpha

Please consider participating in this. Thank you.

--Thermos 16:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

Unfortunately the project page was deleted because of lack of media (I suppose). An undeletion request has been filed and I hope to have the page up on later day. In the meanwhile, sorry for inconvenience. I will notify you on the further developments. --Thermos 03:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Start it as a subpage of your user page. I can move it once it has substantial content. --Dschwen 03:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Be bold, start Commons:Photography it can be deleted if it all turns to custard (it is a wiki you know :-) --Tony Wills 10:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Too late, Fred J has been bold for you, resurrected and moved to Commons:Photography Guide Project Alpha :-) :-) --Tony Wills 10:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! D Hoarfrost1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! D Hoarfrost 3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

POTY

Hey,

Two things. 1) I sent you an email invite to the commonspoty google group, to handle German problems. Did you get it or should I resend?

2) Do you know how MediaWiki:Common.js "dshuf" works? You are listed as one of the maintainers. :) How can we apply it to these pages? Commons:Picture of the Year/2007/Galleries

thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

1) No, I did not get an invite mail. When did you send it?

2) I was thinking about shuffling the pictures. Let me take a look at dshuf again, youĺl have to encapsulate every shuffelable element in a div with a certain class, so that would not work with galleries. Let me check how we did it last year... --Dschwen 17:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

2) alrighty, there was no shuffle last year. Anyways, I added some Javascript to make the POTY galleries shufflable (is that even a word?). Check it out: just surround each gallery you want shuffled with

<div class="dshuf">...</div>

--Dschwen 19:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I already did that for (hopefully) all of the POTY galleries... --Dschwen 19:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I sent another invite to yours lists@... address. If you want to use another one best to send me an email so I know it.

Thanks so much for the shuffling stuff! Very simple as it turns out! :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 07:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, no, not very simple ;-). I had to write some javascript for it. But it wasn't rocket-science either :-) --Dschwen 12:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Well I'm glad you were around then. :) I don't know why that dshuf code was there from last year if it wasn't already usable though. weird... --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It is currently used to shuffle Commons:Meet our Photographers, and before that it was temporarily removed. For POTY2006 we generated a page with [[image:]] tags, not galleries, if I recall correctly. Gmaxwell originally wrote the dshuf routine and back then every shuffled item had to be wrapped in the divs separately. --Dschwen 00:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! D Hoarfrost2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Could QICbot be cloned into a VICbot?

This thread has been moved to here. -- Slaunger 20:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

POTY 2007

Did you already see this? Your cow is a great success! -- Alvesgaspar 01:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey Daniel,

As you may have noticed, the cow has made it to the finals. Congrats and good luck. Don't forget that you are elgible to vote, too. cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 10:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Small HotCat problem

Hi, I have a small issue with HotCat on protected pages. I get the error "TypeError: Undefined value http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-HotCat.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript line:162". Specifically: var t = document.editform.wpTextbox1.value ; On protected pages, there is no editform around the wpTextbox1. Not really a big thing, but I figured you could easily fix it. (and you seem to be the last editor of the gadget. TheDJ 13:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

There is an editform, but only if you are allowed to edit the protected page. If you are not permitted to edit, you cannot add or change categories either. --Dschwen 15:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

My point is that in the case where you cannot, it would be nice to let the JS return before it hits the warning. TheDJ 00:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, that's why I modified the script to not show up anymore when the user has no edit rights. Didn't you notice? Clear your browser cache and see if it works. --Dschwen 00:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, didn't understand you had made a change. Thx. TheDJ 01:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

What's it supposed to do on Special:Upload? wgAction == "view"! Lupo 07:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

If HotCat is supposed to do something on the upload form, we should also make sure that the two scripts don't mess up each other's form submission handling. MediaWiki:UploadForm.js uses form.onsubmit, and constructs the {{Information}} template in that handler, and sets the ID of the description field to wpUploadDescription only at that moment. Before, there is no such element in the tree anymore. MediaWiki:Gadget-HotCat.js uses an onclick handler on the submission button, and presumes that there is an element with ID wpUploadDescription. Which one is called first? Probably the onclick handler... but then, it won't find the wpUploadDescription field, I think. Lupo 10:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, your fix makes it work again on the upload form. Really cool. But we really should figure out that form submission, it indeed crashes on line 65 in HotCat (eb has no properties) on the new upload form, as expected (See below. Lupo 14:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)). Using it instead of the Categories field would indeed be cool. To make sure it's there, I would need to includePage() it in UploadForm.js. What if someone has it already enabled as a gadget? Can we make sure somehow it installs itself only once? Or that the second install doesn't do anything? I'm worried here about script loads being asynchronous, too... Lupo 13:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the crash of HotCat on the new upload form in MediaWiki:UploadForm.js by just making sure the description field has the expected ID "wpUploadDescription". The two now mostly work together. Mostly, because HotCat does not expect that after a click on the upload button, there might be a form.onsubmit handler that actually prevents the form from being submitted. Since HotCat has de-installed its onclick handler already, categories the user adds then through HotCat are not added to the description field upon the renewed submission. And if I just re-install that onclick handler (which I could do in UploadForm.js), it'll add those categories that were added through HotCat in previous submission attempts multiple times. The category field in the form is not yet removed because of the loading problem I mentioned above. Lupo 14:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

well, I suppose you could do a if( typeof(hotcat)!='function' ) includePage('Mediawiki:Gadget-HotCat.js');

That would caus a problem if a user included HotCat not as a gadged, but in his monobook.js, but no user should do that, and if he/she still did we can assume enough JS proficiency on his/her part to figure out the problem :-) --Dschwen 15:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

(de-indent) But Hotcat should also be amended to work correctly if the form is not submitted after the submit button has been clicked. If input validation on the new upload form finds errors, the form is not submitted, and people can then not only correct the error but also further modify the categories. These further category changes are not propagated to wpUploadDescription because HotCat has already de-installed its handler. Just re-installing that handler will lead to duplicate categories on the file. Maybe HotCat could use form.onsubmit (taking care, like UploadForm, to invoke a possibly pre-existing onsubmit handler). Lupo 23:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

We'd just have to take care not to overwrite eachothers onsubmit handlers. --Dschwen 01:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

UploadForm.js already handles this. HotCat can handle it, too. I'll change its submission handling accordingly. Lupo 08:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

See my changes here. Also fixed a layout bug (suggestion box on upload form not appearing). Lupo 09:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, HotCat has problems on IE6. The suggestion box appears too far above HotCat's input field, and clicking on a suggestion just closes the suggestion box, but does nothing else. See for yourself by using this test link in IE. Lupo 10:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

All right, I've fixed HotCat so that it works on IE6, too. I hope I didn't break anything else. See my changes. UploadForm now uses HotCat. See here. Lupo 23:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear QIBot

arrow to one of the problems for humans

Not everyone knows how simple you need things. I am wondering if it is easier to show you how to work with the Recently_promoted page layout or if it is easier to train the humans?

Let me know your thoughts.... -- carol 11:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

QICbot stupid - beep- QICbot need gallery tag - beep - do not remove gallery tag - beep- or QICbot will destroy all humans - beep --QICbot 13:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I'll try to code that naughty bot into submission! --Dschwen 13:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I was trying to stay 'in front' of the bot and I was technically too late to change a vote I made. Which is more important:

1. When clean up is supposed to happen
2. When clean up actually happens

? -- carol 15:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Not quite an answer to your question, but a possible answer to the problem - for all it matters, why not just redefine the definition of 'confirmation of a promotion review' as being when it has been actioned by QICbot. ie while an image is still on the QIC page, it is fair game. :-) --Tony Wills 23:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The image in question, I think that I was approximately 40 minutes off and within the last few months, I have edited my timestamps and have seen timestamps become edited. The bot just runs at the time it runs and that is kind of easy to know and also easy to work with, in my opinion. -- carol 10:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

btw, what time is it?

What time does the bot do its thing? You would not be attempting to give other people 'a leg up' in the case of a race condition to sort those images, would you? -- carol 16:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The time has not changed since the bot was introduced. Check the edit history for yourself, it's about 6am CST or noon in germany. As for the second part, sure carol, we are all out to get you ;-) --Dschwen 17:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I only thought it was one or two. -- carol 17:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No, but in all seriousness, if you as one of the bot turd removers (as you phrased it) have any suggestions about the QICbot runtimes, I'd be happy to change it accordingly. The original timing was more ore less chosen randomly, as we have contributors from so many timezones that unfortunate timing for some people seemed unavoidable to me. --Dschwen 17:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Diva turds if you look everywhere I mentioned this -- but that is not so important. The time stamp here is 17:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC) and the bot usually runs at 12:12. Was there nothing for it to do? Also, did the bot figure out the gallery problem or did the human? -- carol 17:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

QCIBot Duplicates?

Race photographer turds this time -- diff is here and there might be more duplicates, that one just stood out to me. Image:LewisHamilton_2_2007_amk.jpg was declined once and archived twice. -- carol 13:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, good catch, I haven found the problem yet. Maybe one archiving run was interrupted due to slow response from the Wikimedia servers, or maybe a user had an edit conflict with the bot and accidently put the removed pic back onto the QIC page. I wouldn't worry about it too much. --Dschwen 21:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My poor brain. I do not like jokes about the real thing, but since I saw this, all that I can think of is 'double duty'. I don't know if the spelling is accurate, but there are dozens of replacement words for eh, words and functions that need replacement words that our American moms suggested that be used instead of the real words. Duty is one of those words (and it was never encouraged by my mom). Sorry. Sorry here and very sorry about it sticking in my brain. -- carol 11:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts and advice sought :-)

I am having a go at properly internationalising the QI display page. At present there are a number of other language versions, but they are all static copies of how the QI page was when they were translated. I propose having a separate sub-page under each of the different subject pages. eg Commons:Quality_Images/Technical/Exposure/Sample - each 'sample' page is transcluded into the different language QI pages, and the headings are passed as parameters - see User:Tony_Wills/sandbox.

I don't know how to fix the problem with substituting the sub-gallery caption, it doesn't like

<gallery caption="{{{2|Birds}}}" widths="143px">

if I can't do captions that way I will just change them all to sub-headings - eg

==={{{2|Birds}}}===
<gallery widths="143px">

Do you see any problems with this way of doing things, and do you know how to fix the problem with passing the caption into the gallery code? Thanks :-) --Tony Wills 12:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I think template substitution into extensions (such as the gallery tags) is still impossible. I'll have a look on monday, today I'm leaving for a St. Louis weekend trip (yay!). --Dschwen 14:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Well the deed is done, now people can have QI pages with their own language headings and auto-transclusion of the images. I hope there are no side effects :-). PS there is no German language version of that page. --Tony Wills 11:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Now there is :-) --Dschwen 15:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Quick work :-) Does 'Places' in en translate to 'Places' in de ? (excuse my ignorance ;-) --Tony Wills 22:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I just sorted a handful of those images. I put them into the proper gallery and they did not show up on the project page. Did I do something wrong? -- carol 15:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

eh, I think I see what I didn't do.... -- carol 15:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clinton power station pano.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Timestamps

It has been a few months since I worked with mtime and ctime and kin. I frequently use software to change file timestamps for my entertainment diary which is to me like purchasing one of those blank books which is dedicated to writing time entries in.

The bots here can check the whichever of those timestamps that retains the actual time of when the file was modified and not the one that was reported by whoever modified the file? -- carol 12:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The bots do not have access to filesystem timestamps. All they can work with are the timestamps in the signatures. They can obviously be forged, but the whole system is trust-based anyways. --Dschwen 14:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, great. Thanks. -- carol 18:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

But there are a few checks and balances, many eyes are watching QIC nominations etc and notice if something is changed, and there is the wiki page history to fall back on if there is ever a dispute. --Tony Wills 21:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Wiki page histories get edited. -- carol 22:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

QICbot mistake

Hey Daniel, it appears the the QIC bot thought I was the person nominating an image when in fact I was the one that promoted it. See [5] and [6]. Don't know if it's something you've already addressed. --Dori - Talk 22:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The problem is the nominators' signature --[[:fr:User talk:Sémhur|Sémhur]]. QICbot cannot go interwiki for promotions, that would cause a significant amount of problems (i.e. bot accounts on every possible wikimedia project). If someone signs with a non commons signature QICbot just takes the next best signature. Don't worry about it, if people do not sign with commons userpages they don't get notifications. --Dschwen 22:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Reorganise QI sub-gallery concept?

see Commons_talk:Quality_Images#What_is_the_purpose_of_these_galleries.3F --Tony Wills 22:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

QICbot multiline capable?

Will QICbot stumble on multi-line promotion/decline etc templates? I would like to have /discuss templates left back in galleries with each days nominations. I would propose putting an extra, wide, gallery after the main gallery for each day (eg <gallery widths="640px" heights="135px">) where people can move nominations for discussion/CR. These can then be changed to /promotion/decline/withdrawn when complete, but can QICbot handle multiline versions of the templates? --Tony Wills 06:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

St. Louis

Hallo, scheinbar warst du gerade in St.Louis. Mich würde mal interessieren, ob man sich nach der Karte von 1875 die ich mal gesticht habe, immer noch orientieren könnte? http://www.alder-digital.de/louis/ Leider können Bilder in solchen Abmessungen noch nicht auf Commons geladen werden. Da St.Louis wohl die höchste Mordqoute haben soll, finde ich deine Reise ganz schön mutig.;-) --Kolossos 09:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

schicke Karte, aber wenn Du mal nach St. Louis faehrst wuerde ich lieber eine etwas aktuellere Ausgabe verwenden. ;-)

Es Hat mich einige Sucherei gekostet, aber schliesslich habe ich einige strassen gefunden, deren Namen mir bekannt vorkamen, und sogar einige Gebaeude hab ich wiedererkannt. Z.B. das Old Courthouse (zwischen Marktet+Chestnut und Fourth+Fifth) sowie das Old Postoffice building. Ich schau nachher nochmal etwas genauer. Vor allem muss ich noch diverse Fotos hochladen.

Na ja, von der Mordquote hab ich nix mitbekommen, ich empfand STL als sehr angenehm und ruhig (im Vergleich zu Chicago). --Dschwen 13:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Louis night expblend.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Clinton power station 1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Chesterville iron truss bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hitching shed Arcola IL.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! STL Ambulance.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Rapeseed Pic

Dear Mister Schwan,

On http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rapsfeld_2007.jpg I saw your picture of Rapeseed. We are a environmental organization and we are looking for a picture of rapeseed to use in one of our publications about biomass.

I was wondering if we could use this picture?

Kind Regards,

Aukje ter Horst aukje.terhorst@iucn.nl

Image:Oklahomastateseal.jpg

Könntest du bitte das Bild löschen? Ich dachte es wäre Public Domain. Dem ist aber nicht so. Danke im Voraus. --Kevin L. 17:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Erledigt. --Dschwen 17:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! STL Elephant.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:D Hoarfrost1.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:D Hoarfrost1.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 21:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyright infringement

Looks like the BBC have stolen one of your images without attribution: Poison cake kills Iraqi children.

Thought you might want to know. (Thank DragonFire1024 for spotting this one; he told me about it on IRC. WE REPORT YOU DECIDE.) Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 23:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank's. I wrote them a note. It doesn't aggravate me too much, since I'm not intending to make any money with my photography, but it is strange, that these professionals don't seem to comprehend even the little requirements that the license has. --Dschwen 00:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. Hope they decide to give you proper attribution. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 02:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image Image:St Louis night expblend.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:St Louis night expblend.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

--Mywood 09:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

VICBot and a general request for expert help

Hi Dschwen, we are in the process of defining the VIC guidelines and candidates list. I would like to ask you, master of bots, if this looks reasonable from a bots point of view? You may wanna have a look at the {{VIC}} template, which is used in each subpage, see, e.g., here for an example of a subpage. I am not very proficient when it comes to MediaWiki, templates, bots and so, and I would appreciate a sanity check on some of the issues raised in the discussion here. Concerning a bandwidth efficient inclusion of candidates in the candidate list, I was thinking that this could be done by having each subpage have a structure like this

<includeonly>
{{VIC-thumb
  |image=foo.jpg
  |status=discussed
  ...
}}
</includeonly>
<noinclude>
== foo.jpg ==

{{VIC
  |image=foo.jpg
  |status=discussed
  ...
}}
</noinclude>

where {{VIC-thumb}} would render the image in thumbnail gallerysize and give an image border with a colour corresponding to its status (yellow in this case). The image shall have a link to the subpage. What do you think about that idea? When the subpage is transcluded to the candidates list page only the thumbnail is displayed with its state indicated by the image border without any section heading. this gives a convenient overview of the candidates in a bandwidth efficient manner. When clicking on a candidate thumbnail image you are transferred to the VIC subpage for the image where everything is shown and you can add your review. One thing that borthers me with this though is the redundant information, which need to be maintained, like the image name and status. Is there a smarter way to do this?

The creation of the subpage should be assisted much as it is at COM:FPC today. I envision making a template like {{VIC-nomination}}, which displays a prefilled VIC subpage, where the image, initial status, nominator and date is substituted in the template. Does that seems reasonable?

Sorry for asking so many questions. If you cannot help me, or do not have the time, do you have any ideas, who could? -- Slaunger 09:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Quick comment, the redundancy is a problem although I don't have any idea how to resolve that right now. Let me think about it for a while. --Dschwen 16:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't think it would work, but it does: User:Dschwen/Sandbox/VICTest. So your above example would be:

<noinclude>
== foo.jpg ==
{{VIC
</noinclude>
<includeonly>
{{VIC-thumb
</includeonly>
  |image=foo.jpg
  |status=discussed
  ...
}}

The include/noinclude would only decide on the name of the template to use, the arguments would be the same for both templates. Obviously the thumb template would ignore most of the args. --Dschwen 16:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, that it very nice! It took me a few minutes to understand that. It is ugly from a syntactic point of view, but it works! Thank you, you made my day on that trick! -- Slaunger 16:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have experimented with this in my sandbox using this sandbox template: User:Slaunger/VIC-thumb and this trial VIC page: User:Slaunger/Sandbox/Image:USA Antelope-Canyon.jpg. I can make it work, if I hardcode the image name into the template, but I cannot make it take the {{{image}}} as a parameter. It is driving me mad. Obviously I am missing some detail in controlling the expansion of the parameter value. I just cannot see the error. Can you? Thanks in advance. -- Slaunger 18:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I made some changes. You can say good bye to the imagemap idea. It will not work as template arguments are not evaluated within extension tags. Personal comment: I'm not to fond of imagemap anyways as it fundamentally changes a user interface paradigm of mediawiki. We can (and should) add i18n to the text link in the VIC-thumb template (we have several options, CSS- or JS-based). --Dschwen 19:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, the imagemap was just a desperate attempt from an inexperienced user (I liked the info icon link though, which linked directly to the image page). Anyway. Thanks a lot for the update to the template! Does the i18n note imply that for users who are localized to non-en in their user preferences other words than "Image:" is used to prepend the image name? Anyway, I must admit that I did not understand the (several options...) parenthesis. I appreciate smart physicists, especially physicists, who are way smarter than me;-) -- Slaunger 19:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hm, I don't know about that being smart thing... ;-). So you are a physicist too, huh? Which field are you in? (some cyberstalking made me find a paper on polygonal hydraulic jumps, is that you in the author list?). As for the i18n, I was talking about the review page link. It would be easier if the image: prefix was either always in English or even omitted entirely. --Dschwen 20:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not into polygonal hydraulic jumps. I did my thesis work on The Electrical Properties of Atomic-Sized Metal Contacts. However, I left academia seven years ago and I am currently working as a project manager/engineer hybrid in the product development department of a company, which produces radar sensors. -- Slaunger 08:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Last question today: I noticed you replaced the image name spaces with underscores in the test sub page to make it all work. Is there really not a template or something else, which can automate this? -- Slaunger 19:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the underscores are not required. Try to remove them. --Dschwen 20:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You are right, they are not needed. -- Slaunger 08:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Upload form redesign

Could you spare 15 minutes to half an hour and beta-test the redesigned upload forms using Konqueror again? There have been so many changes that I'm not absolutely sure anymore they'll still work on browsers other than IE6 and Firefox.

There are three forms to test:

• Original design with extra fields, but one single description field.
• Alternate design proposed by Pfctdayelise with extra fields and one description field per language (more can be added by clicking the "+"-buttton).
• Basic form for experienced users: no additional fields, just input validation.

Documentation is at MediaWiki:UploadForm.js/Documentation. A mock-up of how Commons:Upload could look if this were enabled globally is at User:Lupo/upload (using the alternate design).

Would be great if you could help out with that; I don't have access to Konqueror myself. Oh, and which one do you think is better: the original design with one single description, or the alternate design with the description-per-language fields? Thanks, Lupo 15:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I just tried the alternate design. The descriptions I entered in the dedicated fields (English and German) dis not show up in the final uploaded image page. Plus I noticed that HotCat is sometimes not working properly - in the upload form it did, but on the regular image pages the XHR seems to die sometimes. Did you change somehing there? I guess the safest way is to destroy and rebuild the XHR object, reusing it is a pain in the a.., I have similar issues with the WMA. --Dschwen 16:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at HotCat again. I've noticed some problems lately, too... Does Konqueror have any "error console"? Any exceptions reported? Otherwise I have no way of figuring out why the descriptions got lost. It works fine on FF and IE6. And if I can't resolve this problem, this will be an early death for the alternate design. :-( Lupo 16:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't throw an error, although it might just not be visible so short before the page reloads. By the way: the Information template doesn't get inserted at all. If I have some more time I make a working copy of UploadFormTest.js and add some debugging output. --Dschwen 16:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

There is MediaWiki:UploadFormTest2.js... (my development version). Has some exception handling commented out. Lupo 16:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re HotCat: I did make one change back on January 20 regarding XHR: using a declared variable for hotcat_xmlhttp so that I can check for sajax_init_object () returning null in order to set hotcat_nosuggestions (which is needed because on IE, people can manually disable XHR, and if so, strange things happened sometimes). But the code still recreates a new XHR object each time, it doesn't try to reuse an existing one. I don't see that causing any of these time-out problems... but maybe I'm blind :-/ Since then, I have not made any changes regarding XHR in MediaWiki:Gadget-HotCat.js. Lupo 16:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

PHP: Exif-Problem

Since you're writing bots, I presume you know PHP. Could you take a look at Commons:Forum#Format_von_GPS_Daten_in_den_EXIF_Informationen and at the file includes/Exip.php in the MediaWiki sources, and either confirm or deny the analysis made at the forum? I don't know PHP all that well. If confirmed, a bug report at bugzilla should be opened. Thanks, Lupo 20:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

QIC bot made an error

It removed a non-processed image. See the last extracted item-on the bottom. --Orlovic (talk) 16:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Unassessed_images_.28nomination_outlined_in_blue.29. Eight days without comments have passed. --Dschwen 17:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Bot process - for consideration

Thinking about the way in which COM:QI presents its images, in that the format now in use has some large galleries that put significant load on the end user to view, and probable load on the servers to populate the thumb nails. would it be possible to have a bot provide a random selection of recent image promotions on the gallery pages like Commons:Quality images/Subject/Plant life load time for me on a DSL line is about 2 minutes atm it will only get worse. Gnangarra 13:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hm, you mean a random selection, that is larger than the four newest pics on COM:QI? Yeah, why not. This might be done with a toolserver page as well. Just note that there is no strain on the servers, as the thumbs are cached by the squid proxies. A bot which had to perform edits to regenerate a random selection page over and over again on the other hand would be strain on the servers. --Dschwen 14:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks didnt know that about the thumbs, I was thinking more on the gallery subpages but yeah if its possible without causing problems ... Gnangarra 14:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

With respect to the long download time for the QI subpages I see only two possibilities.

1. Do a futher breakdown of the gallery pages into smaller and more manageable gallery pages. However, the restructuring in itself requires quite a lot of effort, and it requires more domain knowledge by the users, who move the QIs to the relevant subpages.

   What about dividing them by half, third or quarter year when they reach a certain limit (which should not be very difficult for a bot to do if the other suggestion of keywords is also implemented)? -- carol 20:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

2. Abandon the concept of having all QIs in a coarse hierarchy parallel to the normal content categories. Moving the QIs around requires a lot of administrative effort and it is not a very rewarding job either. I guess a gallery of the most recent QIs within certain subject areas is still in place.

   If the gallery titles could be added to the images when they are in waiting: "Other animals", "Composition" -- it would be much easier, in my opinion. -- carol 20:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Carol, I was thinking something similar. I'd suggest adding a section for every gallery onto the Recently promoted page. Then you'd only have to shift the images around in one page and a second bot run would move the images from the subsections to the actual galleries (and the COM:QI short-galleries). --Dschwen 20:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

That is a much improved version of my idea.... -- carol 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

For the VIs, I have proposed not to maintain topic-specific gallery pages. Each VI should be placed in a Valued Image category. This happens when adding (the yet to be defined) {{VI}} template on the relevant image pages. Instead I see it as more relevant if either the content categories could have an automated added QI/VI icon or for images placed already in content gallery pages, to have seperate VI/QI sections in those galleries (or have a small VI/QI icon added in the gallery description, could this be automated with a bot?). Such a scheme does not require much domain knowledge from the maintainerns. The advantage is that repository users looking for content material in the conventional category/gallery content hierarchy will be guided to the QIs/VIs automatically without having to browse a parallel VI/QI hierarchy. -- Slaunger 15:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding such an icon would be a matter of finding all the inclusions of the image on commons and bot-add the icon to the gallery description. Should not be too hard, and if this is really desired I could give it a shot.

A while ago I proposed a simplified sort into categories/galleries system. I'll do some work it and repropose that later. --Dschwen 15:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Being the QI slave is very unrewarding -- here is my unique problem with it after spending my time with it (I think a big part of the problem is my current location on the planet): I think that it is going to take years and years and much natural sedatives to exorcise this image that has lodged itself into my brain of Wayne Newton playing General Patton. Some things were just not meant to be. Any suggestions from the seasoned wikicommoners? -- carol 20:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

• sorry didnt mean for this blow into a full on discussion over formats, I was just looking for the thoughts on bot capabilities from the person who made QICbot. No point putting a proposal up for discussion if its not possible or a cause server problems. Gnangarra 00:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• • No need to be sorry. The discussion is necessary, and I hope that I can assisst by modifying the bot accordingly. I imagine making monthly subpages for the promoted QIs would be a viable option as well. --Dschwen 00:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Upload form and Konqueror

Did you find out why the alternate design lost your image description? Any leads? Lupo 19:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Working on it just now.. --Dschwen 20:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Got it, it seems Konqueror does not let you set the value of a textarea before you add it to a form. This fixes it. --Dschwen 20:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Incorporated the fix into UploadFormTest.js and also UploadForm.js. Lupo 07:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW: if that is a problem on Konqueror, I would expect the form restoration not to work properly on Konqueror. What happen if you upload something using the alternate design, and then return to the upload form using the browser's back button? Is the form and its values restored properly? Lupo 07:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll check later, but I expect the form to get restored, as Konqueror seems to have built-in form restoration. --Dschwen 13:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Even for dynamically added fields, like the descriptions for the second (and further) languages? Both IE and FF don't do that automatically. Lupo 14:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Holy cow, this is screwed up!

Tested it.. ..and it bombs. Not only does it not fill in the form, but it doesn't even build the dynamic fields, plus it screws up existing elements in the page (see screenie, check out the search field on the left). P.S.:Why are we conversing in english by the way? Wir sprechen doch beide Deutsch :-) --Dschwen 14:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Klar können wir uns auch in deutsch unterhalten :-) Irgendeine Exception, die uns sagen würde, wo das Ding nun abgestürzt ist? Sieht fast so aus, als ob das Skript versucht, die searchform statt der upload Form zu ändern. Und Du solltest ein UploadForm... cookie haben. Wie sieht dessen Inhalt denn nun aus? Lupo 14:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

HotCat und Timeouts

Ich denke, ich hab's gefunden. Ein unnötiger Slash zwischen wgServer und wgScriptPath resultierte in Request-URLs "http://commons.wikimedia.org//w/api.php?..." Aus irgendwelchen Gründen gab der Server für die meisten (aber nicht alle!) solchen Requests einen Fehler 403 ("Access denied") zurück. wgScriptPath ist "/w"... seit ich diesen Slash rausgenommen habe, habe ich keine 403's mehr beobachtet, und HotCat reagiert wieder hübsch rasch. Sachen gibts... Lupo 21:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Klasse! Vielen Dank. Ich hab schonmal geschaut, wie man HotCat auch im Edit-Modus aktivieren kann. Da kann man bestimmt Deine Funktionen fuer die Upload-Seite verwenden. --Dschwen 21:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hotcat ist schon aktiv auf den Preview-Seiten, da diese die Category-Zeile haben (wenn Kategorein vorhanden sind)! Wenn der Benutzer dann dort HotCat verwendet, wird die Seite ein zweites Mal zum Editieren geöffnet. Vielleicht ist es am Besten, HotCat auch auf den Preview-Seiten zu deaktivieren... der hotcat_on_upload-Code kann wohl nicht einfach so übernommen werden (das submit-Handling schon). Übrigens, was war mit Exception und Cookie bei dem From-Restoration-Crash mit Konqueror bei der neuen Upload-Form? Tritt das immer noch auf? Ich habe inzwischen auch beim Form-Rebuild darauf geachtet, dass die Felder zuerst eingefügt und dann ihre Werte gesetzt werden. Davon unabhängig gibt's nun auch noch einen "Preview"-Button auf der Upload-Form. Lupo 22:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, sieht noch ganau so aus wie vorher. Ich versuch's nachher nochmal. Aber Du koenntest fuer das temporaere Textfeld in dem Du das Uploadform zum submitten zusammen baust noch display:none setzen. Mit visibility:hidden entsteht da trotzdem noch ein weisser Freiraum. P.S.: Das preview ist cool. --Dschwen 23:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: display:none: mach ich. Ich hab' nie bemerkt, dass da ein Freiraum entsteht, da die Form dann ja gleich abgeschickt und die Seite sowieso überschrieben wird... aber jetzt seh' ich's auch.

Re: crash: Mist. Aber ich bräuchte wirklich 'ne Exception (oder sonstwie File und Zeilennummer) und den Inhalt dieses Cookies, um überhaupt 'ne Chance zu haben...

Lupo 23:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Kriegst Du. Mach ich am WE! Sorry, hab grad etwas wenig Zeit. --Dschwen 23:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

QIBow

I started this gallery thing here they don't look like galleries because there are no images in them.

Should I continue with that? -- carol 13:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hold on a moment. I've made some preparations to implement this scheme, namely the page renaming today. Let me add support to the qicbot and then we can use the galleries. One problem is that some gallery pages use subsections, and it will be rather hard to tell the QICbot to insert the images into the propper subsections. I'm planning to put those subsections onto separate subpages (which might still be transcluded as templates). --Dschwen 22:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

What about the difference between '==' and '==='?

== Objects ==

=== Electronics ===

regular expressions -- humans are prone to them; after 0 and 1 it is what computers know? -- carol 00:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Another parser problem?

Could you please take a look at COM:VP#Templates for dummies? Somehow, there are spurious empty paragraphs generated on COM:VIC. Oh, and BTW, did you have time to take a look at that form restoration crash with the new upload form on Konqueror? Or should I try to find some other javascript-savvy person also using Konqueror? (No criticism implied; we're all just volunteers and don't have unlimited time. ;-) But it's the only thing that prevents me from proposing to enable it globally...) Lupo 08:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC) (P.S.: sorry, habe automatisch wieder in meiner Default-Language geschrieben...)

Ich finde den verfluchten Konqueror bug einfach nicht! :( Der cookie schaut korrekt aus. Ich weiss nicht wo die wiederherstellung schief laeuft... --Dschwen 13:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Ich nehme an, Du hast schon 'mal probiert, den ganzen Form-restoration Code komplett auszuschalten? Was passiert dann auf Konqueror? Ansonsten hilft vielleicht nur ein Alert nach jedem Statement... primitiv, aber so sollte man zumindest sehen können, in welchem Moment denn die Search-Form so verunstaltet wird. Vielleicht auch 'mal einfach in einem Alert das Cookie ausgeben, so wie's eingelesen wurde (also den Inhalt von previous_form). Vielleicht stimmt ja da etwas nicht... Lupo 18:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Large and thumb galleries

Hi Dschwen, I am, again, in great need of your superior competences within the subtle art of templating;-) The upshot is this: At COM:VIC I have a problem with some templates. To nominate a valued image set, I have thought of doing the same trick as you learned me previously for the {{VIC}} and {{VIC-thumb}} templates with generating a subpage something like this

<noinclude>== {{subst:SUBPAGENAME}} ==

{{VISC</noinclude>
<includeonly>{{VISC-thumb</includeonly>
...
  |ingallery=foo.jpg|Caption for foo.jpg
bar.jpg|Caption for bar.jog
...
  |review=
...
}}

When the subpage is viewed (which is identical to the review page), I would like to display the images in review size. Thus, somewhere in {{VISC}} I want something like

...
<gallery widths="480px" heights="360px" perrow=1>
{{{ingallery}}}
</gallery>
...

Whereas {{VISC-thumb}} would have an equivalent normal display gallery for bandwidth efficiency:

...
<gallery>
{{{ingallery}}}
</gallery>
...

The problem is that the ingallery parameter won't expand when it is encapsulated by the gallery tag. Is there a workaround for this? Thanks in advance, the not so template-knowledgable -- Slaunger 21:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You might want to try the {{#tag:gallery|... {{!}} .. }} syntax. Maybe that helps... --Dschwen 21:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I am not familiar with that syntax. Did a quick search on {{#tag ...}} on meta, but I could not find anything. I had expected it to be documented under ParserFunctions. Do you know where I can find documentation? -- Slaunger 06:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. I figured it out by trial and error. -- Slaunger 16:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Example:

{{User:Slaunger/Sandbox/TestTag
  |widthspx=480
  |heightspx=360
  |image1=Image:Iceberg near sanderson hope 2007-07-24 1.jpg
  |caption1=Iceberg near Sanderson hope|
  |image2=Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 1.jpg|
  |caption2=...with a hole in it.}}

gives:

Very nice... -- Slaunger 16:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

And now implemented in {{VISC}} and {{VISC-thumb}} and used in COM:VIC for valued image set candidates. Check it out! -- Slaunger 22:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Great! Now we'll just have to find a way to work around those annoying linebreaks in the single image candidate gallery... --Dschwen 22:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they are really annoying. Perhaps one could do some nested ifs, but it is really clumsy, and I would hate the swarm of ending braces in the end. -- Slaunger 22:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arcola IL.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

-- Corngrats, carol 09:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Immer noch diese Form restoration...

Tritt dieses Problem eigentlich bei beiden Versionen auf? D.h. sowohl mit UploadForm.js als auch mit UploadFormTest.js? Lupo 11:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ja, tut es, auch im neuen Konqueror 3.5.9 (zuhause haette ich noch 4.0.1 in einer virtuellen Maschine, den probier ich auch nochmal aus). --Dschwen 16:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm, also das Formular wird schon kaputtgemacht bevor UploadForm.install ueberhaupt aufgerufen wird. Also an Deinem code liegts dann wohl nicht. --Dschwen 16:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

• Spekulier* Also, ich habe den Verdacht, dass der Fehler in der eingebauten Form-Restoration vom Konqueror liegt. Evtl. versucht der die Formularfelder zu restoren, die Dein JS dynamisch erzeugt hatte. Aber die sind zu dem Zeitpunkt wo Konqueror die Wiederherstellung versucht noch gar nicht vorhanden. Es koennte sein, dass durch einen Bug dadurch andere vorhandene Elemente ueberschrieben werden. --Dschwen 16:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Doch, doch, ich schaue hier schon noch nach. Watchlist... :-) Das ist ja immerhin 'mal etwas. Ich konnte mir auch so gar nicht erklären was dieses Script in der Search-Form zu suchen hat. Stellt sich nun die Frage, was machen wir als work-around? Im verify die Form in den ursprünglichen Zustand zurückversetzen, d.h. alle dynamisch hinzugefügten Felder wieder wegnehmen, das ursprüngliche wpDescription-Feld wieder einbauen und diesem den (bisher im dummy-Feld geposteten) Wert zuweisen, und dann erst return true und die Form abschicken? Und damit der Benutzer durch die ganze Form-Umbauerei nicht verwirrt wird, vorher noch ein document.bodyContent.style.display = 'none'? Oder einfach mit dieser Unschönheit leben? Lupo 22:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Leider verhaelt sich auch Konqueror 4.0.2 genau so. An den workaround hatte ich auch schon gedacht. Aber eigentlich kann es nicht Deine Aufgabe sein so einen Eiertanz um obskure (mutmassliche) Browserbugs zu machen. Dann klappt die Fromrestoration halt im Konqueror nicht. Ich versuch mal einen einfacherern Testcase zu basteln und mach mal einen Bugreport klar. --Dschwen 02:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Zum "Eiertanz": da hast Du schon recht. Aber selbst wenn dies tatsächlich ein Bug in Konqueror sein sollte, und er in einer neuen Version korrigiert wäre, werden wahrscheinlich auf absehbare Zeit noch genügend Leute ältere unkorrigierte Versionen benutzen. Und die Upload-Form ist nun 'mal essentiell für Commons, da sollte der Benutzer einfach nicht mit solchen Fehlern konfrontiert werden. Von daher könnte es schon die Mühe wert sein, einen work-around zu implementieren... (wenn's denn das ist, und es tatsächlich auf diese Weise umgangen werden könnte). Lupo 08:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

request

Hello. I am working on a large ad campaign for a securities company located in Saint Louis. We are interested in using your night shot of the riverfront. We'd like your permission. How do we get in touch?

Send me a mail to licensing@schwen.de --Dschwen 17:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Lost interest? --Dschwen 19:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Duplicate

Hallo Dschwen. Ich wende mich an dich, weil du Admin und technisch begabt bist. Beim Template:Duplicate (schreibgeschützt für mich) kann man seit einigen Monaten „Image:“ weglassen (wie das ja bei der Vorlage:NowCommons der Fall ist). An zwei Stellen stimmt's jedoch noch nicht, wenn das „Image:“ weglassen wird:

• * [[:Image:Filename old.svg]] → [[Filename.svg]]
• For admins only: Delete this image. („Image:“ fehlt beim Löschlink)

Kannst du das fixen? Das Entfernen dieser Option fände ich übrigens keine geeignete Alternative. --Leyo 18:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Schau mal ob's so ok ist. --Dschwen 02:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ich hab's an einem Beispiel getestet (nur Vorschau) und es scheint mit und ohne „Image:“ alles korrekt. Vielen Dank! Da du nun schon dabei bist, kannst du dasselbe auch für Template:Bad name (ebenfalls schreibgeschützt) machen? Es wäre IMHO nützlich, wenn da „Image:“ auch optional wäre. --Leyo 09:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nun, wie sieht's aus? ;-) Das sollte ja für dich nicht allzu schwierig sein. Ich (als Nicht-Admin) kann's halt leider nicht selbst machen. --Leyo 22:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, hatte ich nicht mehr aufm Schirm. Habs mal entsprechend geaendert. --Dschwen 01:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Danke schon mal. Beim Löschlink (“Admins: Delete this image.”) fehlt's noch. --Leyo 01:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)